SUPREME COURT—Sittings in Basco.

New Zealand Herald, Volume IV, Issue 1129, 27 June 1867, Page 4

SUPREME COURT—Sittings in Basco.

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 26. (Before His Honor Judge Moore.) EOSTE V. BAIN AND OTHEBS, CITY BOAED OP COIIiTISSIOKEBS. Mr. MacCormick appeared for tlie plaintiffMr. Macdonald for the defendants. ' This was an application for a perpetual injunction. The facts of the case are so well known that it will scarcely be necessary to set them out at length. The proceeding ensued upon the verdict recently given by the special jury at the late Civil Sessions in which thev , " nd , {° r o t!lc plaintiiF, and against tho defendants, that a certain cutting in front or plaintiff s house to the depth of eight feet or thereabout would do him irreparable injury, and that the cutting made in front of plaintiffs T^-cr. 7 , 0 def ?? dailts was not done with plaintiff s leave and license. Mr. MacCormick recited the various proceedings taken in the case, and asked his Honor to make the interim injunction which had alreadv I been decreed perpetual. Mr. Macdonald objected to any decree of perpetual injunction being made, ile thought the Gourt would not act in such a matter as had been requested unless satisfied that sullicient notice had been given for the application, and further account ol equity would not regard statements irom counsel as to what had passed in a Court of law, as being sullicient to found an injunction upon. The only way in which the Court could take cognizance of what had taken place in the Court below was by affidavit, and in this case no aflidavits had been submitted to the Court He submitted that upon this ground the Court would not make a decree making the injunction perpetual. Mr. MacCormick said that in the present case where the Judge tried both cases, and was Judge in equity as well as common law, and before whom all the proceedings had been taken, that ! it was sufficient that the application should appear in the ordinary way upon the records of the Court. Mr. Macdonald read the 267 th rule of tho Court, srild that affidavits were necessary to distinguish what had been done in the one Court from what had taken place in the other. It was the invaiiable practice of the Courts in equity to hear statements of fact so far as related to proceedings elsewhere only by affidavit. -H- 01101 -' thought it necessary to proceed by affidavit, and dismissed the application. B. MACHATTIE V. J. s. 3IACFAELANE. This was an application to the Court to place Mr. Joseph Cochrane in the place of Mr. Machattie as sequestrator. The application was granted. IX THE iIATTEE OF J. I". O IvEEFE AND W. J. YOUNGAKBITIUTION. Mr, Hesketh appeared for Mr. TV". J. Yountj • Mr. Weston lor Mr. O'Keefe. In this case an award had been made by the arbitrators directing O'Keefe to pay over to Mr. \oung £1360. Mr. O'Keefe had caused to be taken out a rule nisi to set aside the award on the giound that the arbitrators had gone beyond their powers which were to find out what was due from Young to O'Eeefe. Instead of that they had proceeded to find what was due irom O'Keefe to Young. The application was to have the time enlarged. The Court allowed the time to be enlarged till the 3rd of July without prejudice to Mr Young's taking out a crossrule nisi for the purpose of attaching O'Keefe, if he did not pay the amount; such cross-rule tobe heard immediately after tho decision of the Court upon the rule first granted.

BANKRUPTCY. BE GEORGE XAYLOE. Mr. Hesketh appeared, for tlie petitioner. Tliis was an application for sequestration to be a vesting order. The liabilities were £1400 ; assets, £572. The application was granted, and tlie bearing fixed for the 7th of August.